Open Letter to Hon. Ron Paul Supporters October 29, 2008

Watching the following video by IIB (which that website composed as a witty tribute to Hon. Ron Paul), of all the presidential candidates of the GOP arguing their common thesis primarily based upon the sacred-cow axiom of 'islamofascism', 'radical islam', 'we were attacked', etc., leading to the 'war on terror', plus 'war on Iran due to its nuclear weapons' – please notice that Hon. Ron Paul at no point in his excellent rebuttals actually addresses the unexamined sacred-cow axioms themselves, only the corollaries and derivatives:

Hon Ron Paul retains that idea of 'bin laden', 'al qaeeda', 'external terrorists' did 911, as: “they attacked us”. He therefore, maintains the fiction that there is indeed a real 'militant islam' which is very capable and something to be feared; and they attacked us due to “blowback” of our ill-conceived foreign policies. That they are so powerful that they could override all of America's air defenses with cellphones and laptops from their hideout in the Hindu Kush, and simultaneously control-demolish America's famous tall buildings in a perfectly timed precision destruction collapsing three of them within a span of less than 10 hours into their own footprints at near free-fall speed. His core argument is that misguided America shouldn't be using this “blowback” attack for “imperial mobilization”, but rather, address the powerful 'attackers' concerns of American imperialism inflicted upon them on their own native lands. He spouts 'Constitutionalism', that we should go to Congress for permission first before declaring war. But he never takes on the fiction of manufactured terror, synthetic terror, self-inflicted terror as a 'transformative' event to usher in the long planned world-government, the new world order, even though, he does talk about the New World Order, the North American Union, the neo-con-servatives, loss of national sovereignty, and rightly positions himself as opposing it all. Thus he elicits thunderous applause from the audience!

I don't know about revolution, but it certainly appears to be at least a convolution. Can Hon Ron Paul reason effectively? Would he pass an undergrad class in logic argumentation from first-principles? Yes – provided the first-principles are unquestioned sacred-cow axioms of 911.

This is Hon. Ron Paul's – the 'revolution' – at minute 49:40 in the video:

“They attacked us” – 'they attack us because we have been over there'

“Are you suggesting we invited the 911 attack sir?” – 'I am suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us ... '

So I have a straightforward question: why are you guys supporting Ron Paul? Aren't you the 911 Truthers mostly? Can you guys meet with Hon. Ron Paul (okay I would like to too) and have a discussion on his answers to the integrity test on http://humanbeingsfirst.org/#Happy-Birthday-America-2008-Litmus-Test. Ask him why he retains the sacred-cow axioms just as intact, and just as unexamined, as those whom he argued against in the GOP debate?

Indeed, when he cleverly retains those very sacred-cow axioms as untouchable truths, that we have real enemies who attacked us, that these enemies aren't fabricated, and aren't manufactured to calculatingly fight World War IV as wars are known to be great catalysts to transform society rapidly towards the long time in planning real unhidden agendas, then, the same unexamined sacred-cow axioms with new synthetic cataclysmic events – okay false-flag events, meltdowns of every sort – can continue the fabricated 'war on terror' which today Ron Paul opposes.

If you retain axioms, you can always construct new corollaries upon them, and explain them away as new contingencies, new happenstances, new emerging circumstances.

Ron Paul argues in the video that the Executive must come to Congress? Okay – the Congress just passed, in a truly bipartisan fashion, the terrific House Floor speeches notwithstanding, the trillion dollar banksters' bailout bill, not to mention the 600 billion dollar 2009 Defense appropriations.

And coming to Congress is what the Executive has repeatedly been doing all along since 911, and it is the Congress which keeps on passing all the oppressive legislation and the budget appropriations which enable the 'war on terror' during these past seven years. It is Congress which directly enables maintaining Iraq and Afghanistan as America's testing ground for its newest high-tech weapons of mass destruction, and all sorts of tortuous conquest stratagems invented by the Rand Corporation, the AEI, and the hundred other privately funded foundations and think-tanks along the Hudson and the Potomac! It is also the Congress that has approved the police-state in America.

So if we follow Hon Ron Paul's prescriptions for 'revolution', we end up with a) all the sacred-cow core-axioms of 911 still intact, but now under the new mantra of a 'smaller government', and b) the Executive coming to Congress for approvals for its adventures and weighty-purses, as mandated by the Constitution, and Congress approving all those requests with a great show of debate (or non-debate in which case amidst a great spectacle of House Floor speeches) precisely as it does today!

What's up with the American peoples? And I refer to the supposed thinking ones! Why don't even you ask the right questions, never mind the mainstream? It entirely appears to me that the so called rebels in America are perhaps mostly the Group-two peoples noted by Hitler – simply oppose anything for the sake of opposing without much thinking, and thus favor anyone who opposes. Few are Group-three, those who really think and act accordingly. Almost all are Group-one for sure – “the crowd of simpletons and the credulous.” See Weapons of Mass Deception – The Master Social Science for an explanation of these groups in Hitler's own prophetic words and apply them yourselves to your own state in America. Judge for yourselves whether dissent is being manufactured, just like consent has already been manufactured!

Here are some ideas for real weighty issues to bring up to your 'rebel' leaders before you vote for them, be it Democrat write-in candidate such as Dennis Kucinich, Republican write-in candidate such as Ron Paul, or independent write-in candidate such as Ralph Nader.

Please also watch these additional video clips here, here, and those here. Why does the Hon. Ron Paul persistently shy away from calling 911 an 'inside job' at every opportunity he gets? And why does he present the financial meltdown as merely due to shortsighted and foolish overspending (just like Mr. Fred Thompson does), rather than as the long-running Machiavellianly manufactured crisis that it is to schemingly usher in world-government? See Financial Terrorism November–December 2008 Financial News Analysis in Context.Even when Ron Paul gets thrown an easy-shot at calling it a 'conspiracy' by Glenn Beck, he doesn't hit a home run. Why? Wit the following interesting exchange (beginning at 3:56 minutes):

GB: “I will tell you Congressman, that while I am not a conspiracy theorist by any stretch of the imagination, I will tell you that it almost feels like we are being set up by players that, for instance, the secretary of the treasury right now, he worked at Goldman Sachs, he was a big guy at Goldman Sachs, all of the players, they all know each other, this is the old boy network here, and they cannot be this stupid, to not see what they are doing.”

RP: “I don't have a final answer on that, because I am bewildered by that too. You see them making a lot of money, they love they system, but I think what happens is that they believe they can control it. You know they have this President's working group on financial markets, the plunge protection team, and they are always believing they can be bailed out. But eventually the markets are more powerful than all those who do this planning, whether it's central economics planning to banking and monetary affairs, eventually the market rules, and this is what's happening today. The market is shouting that you have overstepped your bounds, and you can't do it any longer. So it will bring us to our knees.”

GB: “Congressman, the Democrats are saying this is Bush's problem, and you know the failed economics, the right is screaming this is Congress's problem, and the Democrats. I think it's both of their problems, but yet it's so much more than that because this is, and this isn't seemingly getting very much attention connecting these two. Our politicians are saying one thing, but the rest of the news on TV is showing this is a global problem. This is happening all over the globe. Is that Congress's fault too, is that the President's fault, did we cause it in the rest of the world, or have the central banks done the same thing to the rest of the world?”

RP: “No it is, the seeds were planted in 1913, they really came to bloom in 1971, it was made worldwide because we have a total fiat currency created by the Bretton Woods breakdown in 71, but the world accepted the dollar as a reserve currency of the world. It literally said you can print your gold as much as you want, so everybody is in bed together. So this idea that if you think the dollar is going down in value that you can protect yourself by going to the euro or the yen, it is not going to work. Only hard assets will protect you because prices are going up. And the world economy is global. Global economies are good when they are market driven. But when they are driven artificially by central banks colluding, so it's not just our central bank, all the central banks talk to each other, but we in the Congress can't even audit them. We don't even know this. We can find out more information about the CIA, which is rather secretive, than we can about the Federal Reserve. Just like the other day when they came up with these bailouts, you think they even consulted Congress? (No) Spend 85 billion dollars and Congress just doesn't do anything. We are nationalizing these industries, and there doesn't seem to be any that much concern.”

GB: “Well there is here Congressman. ... It seems to me Congressman we are ending up with bigger and even more powerful banks. We are losing everything small, and retaining only thing that is very big global and powerful. How do we ever escape the global clutches of these gigantic financial institutions and the FED, when we are now handing them all of the power?”

RP: “It's going to be very difficult, unless we have a real serious discussion here in Washington where the mistakes were made, and undo those mistakes and devise another system, it's gonna continue that way, and the big guys are going to end up owning everything. You say Oh no it's the Federal Reserve, it's the tax payer, but somebody is involved, somebody is controlling that, somebody is going to be benefitting. You know the CEOs aren't suffering. They are still getting their parachutes, and their millions of dollars. So the big guys are protecting themselves. But eventually, it always comes about. Monetary history shows that this type of monetary system will not last, and eventually they have to sit down and devise a brand new system. The biggest question is, will it be in a free society or will it be in a totalitarian society. And right now, we are moving rapidly toward more government, and bigger government, and control by big banks and big corporations.”

GB: “It is very frightening. Is this, you know I said at the beginning of the show, I said, about a year ago, one day America you gonna wakeup on a Monday, and by Friday, your country will not be the same. This is not necessarily how I envisioned it because I thought people would wakeup by Friday. Is this that week, Congressman?”

RP: “No, this is the preliminary. There will be worse weeks. Worse weeks to come, because the seeds have been planted. You say what can you do to prevent the recession and the correction? You can't do anything. When you cause the problem of over-investment, mal-investment, excessive-debt, you can't solve the problem unless you do the liquidation, and that's the painful part that nobody wants to accept. And we haven't taken care of that problem. So unless we understand that, and the people understand it, they won't know why we have to go through this problem.”

GB: “Real quickly Congressman, I have got only about ten seconds, yes or no, has any body in Congress come to you that wasn't necessarily on your page, and said, you know what Congressman, don't tell anybody but you're right.”

To appreciate the real un-hidden agenda which Ron Paul only superficially flirts with and hurriedly withdraws before full-contact engagement as if afraid to consummate to its natural logical conclusion, see Response to Financial Times Gideon Rachman's 'And now for a world government'. Also see the Monetary Reform Bibliography – A self-study guide for uncovering the agendas behind the economics gibberish. We have a saying in my language, translated it goes: half a doctor – threat to one's life; half a mulla – threat to one's activism (or spiritualism). Would you pay a doctor a second visit who will rehearse your symptoms eloquently enough, but will not diagnose your disease beyond happenstances and mistakes as if afraid of being sued by the Board (not by the patient) if he probed deeper into the case of deliberate homicidal poisoning, a criminal conspiracy to do the patient in? Being Americans, probably yes!

Which is why, Hon. Ron Paul, and all others like him in Congress who made such a glamorous show of challenging the bailout – No Exits on this Super-Highway! – found no compelling reason to observe the commonsense strategy laid out in Project Humanbeingsfirst's 'now or never' letter to them. It wasn't exactly rocket science. They are apparently more afraid of being terminated by the Board, but the electorate will surely re-elect them again and again if they only make all the right symptomatic noises and stay away from substance. To which every one among the plebes continually applauds “wah wah” (i.e., bravo, bravo) and does what's predictably expected of them.

The day Dr. Ron Paul will say “911 was an inside job”, would be the day when it would be too late. Just like Prof. Noam Chomsky surely will too! Both will publish many history books – in about a 100 years – and may providence give them such a long extended life so that they may be witness to these portentous words while they straightforwardly explain how the 'one-world' government was so craftily won. It would be fearlessly narrated as the history of crimes of the new empire – the new rogue superstate – with a new cult following in tow. So ask them today and spare our progeny tomorrow from having to deal with a much more intractable problem.

The author, an ordinary researcher and writer on contemporary geopolitics, a minor justice activist, grew up in Pakistan, studied EECS at MIT, engineered for a while in high-tech Silicon Valley (patents here), and retired early to pursue other responsible interests. His maiden 2003 book was rejected by six publishers and can be read on the web at http://PrisonersoftheCave.org. He may be reached at http://Humanbeingsfirst.org. Verbatim reproduction license at http://www.humanbeingsfirst.org#Copyright.

Reprint License

All
material copyright (c) Project HumanbeingsfirstTM, with
full permission to copy, repost, and reprint, in its entirety,
unmodified and unedited, for any purpose, granted in perpetuity,
provided the source URL sentence and this copyright notice are also reproduced verbatim as part
of this restricted Reprint License, along with any embedded links within its
main text, and not doing so may be subject to copyright license
violation infringement claims pursuant to remedies noted at
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html. All figures, images,
quotations and excerpts, are used without permission based on
non-profit "fair-use" for personal education and research
use only in the greater public interest, documenting crimes
against humanity, deconstructing current affairs, and scholarly
commentary. The usage by Project Humanbeingsfirst of all external
material is minimally consistent with the understanding of "fair
use" laws at http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html.
Project Humanbeingsfirst does not endorse any external website or organization it links to or references, nor those that may link to it or reprint its works.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of US Copyright Laws, you
are provided the material from Project Humanbeingsfirst upon your
request, and taking any action that delivers you any of its documents
in any form is considered making a specific request to receive the
documents for your own personal educational and/or research use. You
are directly responsible for seeking the requisite permissions from
other copyright holders for any use beyond “fair use”.